English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room - 2014-07-31 (page 2 of 4)

« first day (1358 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3557 days later) »

3:00 AM

@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 Nah, that's just a viscous rumour, I hope.

cornbread ninja 麵包忍者

Sludgy.

We like to stay in the news :)

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

AFAIK, no, not even in theory. Now, Queen Elizabeth II is both the queen of England and of Canada; she could, in theory, exercise what little power she has in some way that benefits England over Canada. But her real powers are pretty miniscule and if she ever tried that we'd probably end up becoming a republic.

@Cerberus I don't know. Some of them were already self-governing, it was probably just a formality. "Take care of your own things".

cornbread ninja 麵包忍者

@skullpatrol ha!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@skullpatrol A rumour with a thick, sticky consistency?

3:02 AM

Yep :D

I stuck with them when they moved to LA so...

...and when they lost 11 games every year for 7 years straight.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 But maybe in case of an emergency or a stalemate or something.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Well, we have a "representative" of the queen here, the Governor General, who handles whatever duties the queen has.

I really can't imagine what would happen if the Queen herself tried to do something.

even the GG's role is almost 100% ceremonial

Right.

Our Queen's role is also almost entirely ceremonial.

But who knows what she could do in exceptional circumstances?

Damn, I keep forgetting we have a king now.

First time since 1898.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The only kind of emergency where the GG or Queen wield power is when there is some kind of constitutional issue, such as when the government asked to prorogue parliament a few years ago. The PM asked the GG and she said yes. That was all.

She claimed that she consulted with constitutional lawyers and there was basically no justification for her to act in contravention to the government's wish.

Essentially, the Queen is ceremonial. She doesn't get involved. The GG likewise.

Right.

Because circumstances are pretty normal.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:13 AM

And the Queen being British instead of Canadian is pretty much the only link to England that remains.

But even in unusual circumstances, we have constitutional law, and if we ever found a situation where the constitution didn't actually function, then either A) it needs fixing and there is a process for that and certainly the Queen has no idea how to fix things, or B) if the constitution does not appear to apply then a regular law can be made to fix the problem.

Sure, we could have a situation where, say, the country is falling apart and devolving into rebellion or civil war or something. But in such a situation, would anyone care what the Queen said?

Personally I'd like for us to become a republic, but again, constitutional change being too hard and all, it'll never happen.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yes, something like that. When it's on the brink of something extraordinary to happen. Perhaps there will still be some people willing to heed her warning.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Why? Don't you think it's fun to keep historical ceremonies?

For that reason, I'd like us to become a Republic again.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Enh. Not particularly. I'm not a big fan of monarchies and I think it's odd that our queen is British. I'm sure it's confusing to a lot of immigrants. We are our own nation, and we should have our own monarchs, or better yet, eschew archaic feudalism and embrace modern democracy fully.

More importantly I'd like to get rid of, or reform, the Senate; it's a mess, but again, constitutional reform is too hard, blah blah blah

Our senators are appointed by the PM and they serve for "life" and they can prevent legislation from passing.

as far as I can tell it's a colossal waste of money.

But maybe if we had, say, equal per-province representation in the senate (like the US does), then we could fix the House of Commons, where some provinces get way more members of parliament than they should, based on population.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I'm sure there are other things that you like mainly just because they are old.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That is horrible! Why by the PM?

Our senators are elected by the provincial governments, but proportionally per province.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus I like some things because they are old. But the government is not a museum.

Every provincial election, half of the senators are replaced.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:24 AM

@Cerberus The Senate has been a steaming pile of dung since 1867.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Why not? I'm sure your government has tons of other rituals and customs that are old and serve no real purpose other than being fun for people.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I think the House of Lords is partly equally bad.

Rich party donors get appointed by the government, I think.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus yes. The Senate was modeled after the HoL

Ugh.

Good luck trying to get a senate to reform itself...

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Yes, I find many of their rituals and customs odd. And since the government is meant to be a functioning apparatus, I think it behooves us to modernize things from time to time.

Only if you get material benefits from that. And you can modernize the necessary elements while keeping as many of the old elements as possible if they are fun for people.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:28 AM

@Cerberus Well, the senate can't reform itself. However, it would be required that it pass the amendment.

Everyone loves the monarchy here. Well, the large majority. The rituals are fun for everyone.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That's what I mean.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Yeah, see, you actually HAVE monarchs. We don't even have our own.

She is your Queen too, Mr Shiny.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Though I wonder what would happen if, say, all 10 provinces and the House of Commons all voted to abolish the senate. If the senate didn't pass the bill, but the rest of the country dismantled the institution, what would happen?

It would be unable to.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:30 AM

@Cerberus The only effect she has on my life is to provide a head for my coins.

Unless it declared a coup d'état, which is of course always a possibility.

They do that in Belgium when the King refuses to sign a bill, a temporary coup.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus who's "it"?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Same here. But he's still my King. Even though I'm not a huge fan of him.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Well, you just said that people there enjoy the rituals and stuff.

Most people in Canada have never and will never see a monarch.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 The rest of the country. Or the Commons. Or anyone who would be able to get most of the country or those who matter to accept it.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 You don't need to see her in person.

She visits Canada from time to time, doesn't she?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:33 AM

@Cerberus Right. But neither will they ever see any of the pomp that goes along with her. She may as well be on mars. Or imaginary.

She's says some thing about how nice Canada is, and everybody smiles.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Oooh, 20 times.

in 40-odd years.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Same here. I always see the monarchs on television and nowhere else.

Just like the PM.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Still makes for nice television.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Yes but we don't even see her on TV. She's not part of Canadian TV.

She is every other year, isn't she?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:34 AM

@Cerberus I'm sure most people don't care.

Perhaps you should put her on television more.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I don't believe that. The whole world watches when e.g. William and Kate marry.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Seriously if the whole royal family disappeared it'd probably take a year for Canadians to notice.

Haha.

Just as we all watched when the Swedish crown princess married her sports instructor.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus The whole world watches when Kanye West and ... um. whoever he's with, have a baby.

They're just celebs.

So the monarchy is a nice way to show people how your put on a really nice show, not a tacky orgy of commercialism.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:36 AM

Seriously the royal family is like Paris Hilton.

Except with taste.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus pssh. you just say that because you like old stuff more than new stuff.

Lots of the ceremonial crap that the royals do is totally gaudy and overdone.

But because it's OLD gaudy and overdone, nobody notices.

All of society watches a royal wedding, while only certain people watch a wedding between some record-label puppets with horrible stuff.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 It's gaudy but good!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Those two weddings are of equal value to me.

Why should either of those couples get my attention?

They shouldn't be.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:38 AM

One couple was born to riches. The other couple feature people who actually worked for their money.

It is like comparing an eclipse to the lid being put on a rubbish bin.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I see no reason why I should care one whit about someone being royalty or not. It is an archaic idea.

There are similarities, especially if you're sitting in the bin. But one is cool while the other is disgusting.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Actually I find royalty, as a concept, slightly disgusting.

Not really that cool.

Odd.

They are not and cannot be doing anything bad any more.

Do you also want to destroy the pyramids, because they celebrate royalty?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:40 AM

They are not doing anything at all! Why do they deserve my respect or even notice?

Why do the pyramids deserve your respect? Or do they?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The pyramids are historical. William and Kate are not.

The institute is historical. Just because it's abstract, doesn't mean you can't like it for the same reason.

You don't have to like W. and K. specifically. I don't.

Although it's really cool if you have a monarch you actually like.

It's like...when an ancient building is actually used in a way that you like.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The institute is historical. And yet it perseveres. And it brings along certain flaws. Like, William cannot marry someone who's not Anglican. That's bullshit, right there. Also, Kate cannot refuse to have children. She is not a full person; her job is to have children, in order to preserve some dumb bloodline.

Well, maybe certain aspects to it could be changed.

Just as the pyramids have flaws.

But of course William and Kate can choose to walk away.

3:44 AM

the pyramids were built on the backs of slaves...

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The pyramids are old. I'm not complaining about them because they're old. Things being old is not a problem.

@skullpatrol So you want to destroy them now?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The problem is that the monarchy continues.

And not slaves, just poor farmers, mostly.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I would object to building MORE pyramids.

3:45 AM

What if building more pyramids were not especially expensive, and people liked it?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

In fact I object to graveyards.

@Cerberus Sure, they can have their circuses. But then you have to concede that it's just a really old form of Paris Hilton. They're famous because people want famous things.

The pyramids do continue to exist. And they require upkeep, which is expensive. At least the upkeep of our historical buildings everywhere is extremely expensive. But we wouldn't want it any other way. If anything, we find it more important now than ever.

1 min ago, by Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I would object to building MORE pyramids.

on the the backs of more poor farmers

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@skullpatrol No, the means of construction aren't relevant to my point.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Sure. But with better taste. In the same way that an ugly curtain is like a beautiful curtain.

You burn one but keep the other.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:47 AM

@Cerberus Maintaining old buildings is completely different from trying to make new old buildings in the old way just because we always made them that way.

But is it different from maintaining the monarchy?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus taste is 100% subjective.

We could save lots of money if we tore down old buildings and built new ones.

Like the Americans do.

Or did.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus What do you know about that. The Americans don't HAVE old buildings.

Seriously most of America is like 100 years old.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 So what? That Caravaggio is better than your daughter's drawing (no offence) is also 100% subjective. And yet I'm sure you will agree that we want spend more money on preserving that which is more beautiful.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 All of Manhattan had old buildings once.

They destroyed them all.

Because they didn't care about history or aesthetics at the time. We, too, destroyed more old buildings in the past.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

3:51 AM

@Cerberus So you are saying that having a monarchy is the same as putting an old painting in a museum.

Even in the sixties, there were serious plans to fill in all the canals here.

Out with the old, in with the new.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yes, and spending money to maintain it. Even if the majority are not particularly interested in art.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Making new people fill ceremonial roles, filling their lives with make-work, doing pointless ceremonies, etc, etc, because.... what? the monarchy itself is beautiful?

@skullpatrol Heresy!

3:51 AM

:D

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus But the government is not a museum.

Put the portraits of the monarchs in the museum. Put videos of the songs and dances there too. Hire actors to stage re-enactments. Whatever you want.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Exactly. And also because many people like it, and it can make people feel more like...one country. Of course there are limits to this: if everyone really hates it, then perhaps it is time for a change.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Why does any of that pointless crap need to be in the actual, functioning government?

Because the continuing existence of the monarchy and the continuing practice of the rituals are like the continuing existence and display of an historical building, as opposed to pictures of the building.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus What about when a significant fraction of your country still harbours resentment over past injustices perpetrated by agents of that monarchy, to the point that they wish to secede?

3:54 AM

The city is not a museum either. And yet we want to maintain its old buildings.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, depends on the size of that fraction?

If everybody hates the pyramids and really wants to destroy them, like 99% of the people, and it isn't just a whim, then perhaps it is time to place large explosives in the holy shrine in the centre and blow everything up. Like the Taliban with the huge ancient Buddhas, except with 99% support.

I would cry, but there are limits to keeping old things.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus But old artifacts are different than new artifacts made to look like old ones.

The new King is not the old King.

All things are different.

The roof of the church that is restored after a huge fire still has value an an historical object.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Old things can be intrinsically valuable: for example, to examine them to see what you can learn.

But let's forget about that aspect.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

But if the pyramids naturally decayed after a time, would it make sense to build a new, replica pyramid?

3:58 AM

(You could learn about the effects of monarchies on society by maintaining one...)

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 It would make sense to keep using new materials to repair them.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

You can learn about that through history too. It's pretty well-documented.

@Cerberus Only to a point.

Monuments crumble to dust if you do not maintain them. Especially ones less sturdy than the pyramids.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

If someone stole one of the pyramids, would it make sense to build a new one in its place?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 The same applies to pictures and x-rays of buildings.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Frankly I think your comparison of modern people acting as "monarchs" to ancient pyramids is a little weird.

3:59 AM

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 It depends. Whenever ornaments are stolen or damaged on a building, we also replace them.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Yes, but the WHOLE THING.

Haha. Of course they are not the same in all respects. One is abstract, the other is not.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Let's say someone completely destroyed or removed one of the pyramids.

Would it make sense to replace it?

What would be the point?

Would I reinstate the monarchy if it had been completely "destroyed", i.e. if all customs and descendants had long faded from memory? Possibly not.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Now let's say that the pyramids disappeared every 80 years or more.

4:01 AM

Ah, but what I like about the monarchy is not the person, but the abstract thing.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus But the customs can be maintained by anyone, i.e. actors, and the descendents should not be accorded special treatment on account of who their parents are.

@Cerberus And what I dislike about the monarchy is mostly the abstract thing.

Actors would not be the same thing. People wouldn't like it.

So agree to disagree ;-)

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, of course monarchs have done bad things. But also good things. And there are some ideals behind the institution that are noble.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus There are noble ideals behind EVERYTHING, even Naziism.

4:03 AM

Yes.

Some things about fascism are noble. Not everybody is willing to understand that.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I think the inherited-power thing ceases to be unfair once there is no real power any more.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

What I want is to remove from government the notion that a certain person is guaranteed a certain role in the government on account of their DNA.

What "nobel" ideals did the Nazis have?

The abstract idea of purity?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus It is still a symbol of unfairness.

It is what you make of it.

If the Queen is known to be leftwing, is she still a symbol of unfairness?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

4:08 AM

@Cerberus who cares? Why should I care about her personal political leanings? She's just some British woman.

Haha.

Well, you were talking about symbols of unfairness.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The monarchy itself is unfair.

Anything can be viewed as a symbol of unfairness.

Your clothing. Your birth.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

For example, I could never marry into it, since I'm not Anglican.

They are the oppressors of the common people.

4:09 AM

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, maybe they should change that.

@skullpatrol Don't be silly.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

What? change something?! But then it won't be the same old historical institution!

Ah, I am not saying every tiny aspect of every tradition should be set in stone!

@Cerberus they're not?

A tradition should be a living thing.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

But must a tradition be maintained forever? Just because?

4:10 AM

@skullpatrol Of course not. Why do you think the countries with the highest income and power equality are mostly monarchies?

Let's say the top 5.

luck?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Really? mostly monarchies?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 It depends. All I'm saying is that I think the very fact that it is old is something that's cool. Doesn't mean there can be other, bad aspects to them that can make abolishing them the right decision; but the fact itself is nice. It's an argument—weigh it as you will.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Maybe all?

I haven't looked.

@skullpatrol I think there may be an indirect relation. But what I wanted to say was that monarchies do not necessarily oppress people any more than republics do. The worst countries in the world are republics.

Like most of Africa.

well we all know it takes money to make money :-)

How is that related?

4:14 AM

monarchies have money, by definition

they have accumulated money over the ages by taxing the poor

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Old things are nice and all. But I have philosophical problems with monarchy itself. Yes, fine, they've allowed themselves to be reduced to mere decorations, but they are still part of government. The represent all the good AND bad crap that's happened in the past. Just look at England's history, how much of it involved fighting for the throne. We should put that behind us. Especially here in Canada, where we are not England and the queen is meaningless to us.

I find it offensive that new citizens are made to swear allegiance to the queen.

She's not even Canadian.

@skullpatrol Modern monarchies take very little money from the public.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I don't think people should be made to swear allegiance to other people like that. It's so medieval.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 How about churches, then? They also have histories that I do not like.

@Cerberus because they are living on the interest of their old money :-)

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

4:17 AM

@Cerberus Yes, I would abolish churches, as organizations, if I could. The buildings we can keep.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Maybe they should abolish that particular ritual then?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus we can't! We're a constitutional monarchy!

@skullpatrol Not really. Many monarchs don't have huge incomes.

I mean, compared to the richest people in the country.

@Cerberus who are we talking about here?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Finances of the British Royal Family

The British Royal Family is financed mainly by public money, but there are also a number of private sources of income. The British Parliament meets the cost of the Sovereign's official expenditure from public funds. This includes the costs of the upkeep of the various royal residences, staffing, travel and state visits, public engagements, and official entertainment. The Keeper of the Privy Purse is Head of the Privy Purse and Treasurer’s Office and has overall responsibility for the management of the sovereign’s financial affairs. == Income == === The Civil List === Until 1760 the mon...

4:19 AM

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Why not the buildings, the ancient fresci? They symbolize religion in the strongest possible way...

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I think they are the richest.

At any rate, it is not relevant.

money is always relevant

Modern monarchies are not a heavy burden on taxpayers.

It is not.

without money they wouldn't be where they are

If a monarchy is a heavy burden on taxpayers, then, yes, that needs to change. But it is not, so that is irrelevant.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus The buildings are artifacts. Once stripped of their toxic teachings and power-hungry priests, the buildings are just a glimpse of the past. But the Churches continue to teach wrong information and promote harm for society to this day, so I would like to see them die off. However, you can't just abolish churches. They're like Hydra, cutting off the head just makes two pop up.

4:21 AM

Without killing lots of people, our ancestors would not have been able to build our societies and beget us.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Yes, the past is full of regretful things.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I don't know: if the institution has become harmless, e.g. because it has been sufficiently marginalised, I kind of like keeping it, as an abstract monument. A monastery where all the nuns die of old age and no new women arrive to replace them, for example, that makes me sad. Even though I am really glad that not many people are nuns any more.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus So are you sad that there are no more alchemy guilds? No more phrenology schools?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yeah, and in that way everything we are and everything we have is tainted. But I don't think that is a productive way of thinking. Now if it is really recent, or if it is the same people who actually did it, then perhaps they need to be erased. But otherwise, where is the end?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Kind of! It would be really cool to have one alchemist school left, wouldn't it? Admit it, you would want to visit it!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus I think we can make it productive in terms of trying to fix the present and plan for the future.

4:25 AM

But once things have been utterly destroyed and are gone, eventually we often start to care less. But the nuns are being destroyed under eyes (by time).

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus It would be cool, but just as cool as if the alchemy school was populated by well-trained actors who were accurately depicting their craft. Because the alchemy itself is worthless.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 How do you mean?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Nooo that wouldn't be the same! Surely you wouldn't want people to destroy the real David and replace it with an easier to maintain replica?

It is in a way irrational, but we humans like authenticity.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus I mean we can look at something like the monarchy and decide that the symbol of patriarchy and birthright and divine mandate and all the rest of that crap is not worth keeping around in our functioning government, because we've grown past all of those ideas.

We can set up the government as a model of how to do things.

Instead of some kind of half-functioning, half-decorative thing.

I wonder why you still see it as that.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus What, exactly, is the difference between the real David and a really good replica?

4:28 AM

To me it is as disconnected from the dark aspects of its past as a church that has been a government building since 1600. Or the Parthenon.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 The knowledge that it is fake. It is irrational, but real. It is how we people work.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus But in the case of an alchemy school, how would you differentiate a real one from a fake one? Given that their knowledge is itself bogus.

By its traditions.

If there is some continuity.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus What if the traditions were meticulously copied from the last cohort of staff/students to the actors entrusted with maintaining the guild?

If you abolish it and reestablish it 100 years later, then it will probably feel "fake".

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 No, they can't be actors.

They can be people who do not believe in alchemy, but not actors.

it feels "fake" now, to me

4:32 AM

A friend of mine was a minister who didn't believe in God, just like many people in her church. That's still good.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

But eventually, either you'd need people to study "real alchemy" and be students/teachers in the school, learning and teaching bogus crap for years, or else just fake it. Because alchemy itself is dead.

That's just sad.

Well, yes, there are problems.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Throw off the shackles of the past!

You can limit the activities that are carried out in the school.

Maybe change it a bit, e.g. devote most of the students' time to historical research of alchemy.

But still have the Cauldron Master (a part-time job) stir the Great Cauldron at Midsummer!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

At some point, the last alchemists stopped being alchemists and became chemists. When that happened, it was because alchemy was finally accepted as a sham. When it is known to be a sham, you cannot have a school of it! Anyone in the school would either be a dupe or an actor.

4:34 AM

And please let him not wear sneakers under his robes, at least not visibly.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus It is just a reenactment at that point.

It is the same as when I go to the old British forts and see people dressed up in costumes firing muskets.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, it may be impossible at the time. Sometimes traditions die, for good or for bad.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yes, kind of. The same applies to our current monarchy. Or my friend's church. But people still enjoy it and/or take comfort in it.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That's different! Then it becomes fake.

You see the difference? I mean, I see your point, and it is irrational, but people still like it that way.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Fine. So take the monarchs and put them in a museum. Train people to learn all the steps to the dances and words to the songs. Establish a continuity of knowledge if you want. Just remove it from the government.

But that is part of the tradition!

And the people love it.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Well, lots of Canadians don't love it.

4:37 AM

I bet if you asked people to donate money to maintain the monarchy or else it would be abolished, you'd be able to raise quite a bit of money.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 But I do!

Probably.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

If you ask people "Who is Elizabeth II?" they'll say "Queen of England"

But anyway, it's been fun, but it's 6:37.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Yeah that's what time I'm getting up

Ouch.

Then you should have been in bed hours ago...

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I have to take my son in for a dr's appt at 8:30

yeah but someone was wrong on the internet

4

4:38 AM

Nothing serious?

Heh.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

an allergy test

Same here.

Oh, OK.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

but it's a food challenge, so it's done in hospital in case something goes wrong.

Well, I hope you find one very specific allergy, and that it's something that is easy to avoid.

Hmm hospital is not fun.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

I'm hoping to NOT find the allergy

4:39 AM

Why not?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

The hope is that he grew out of it.

Presumably, you are sending him because he has problems?

Oh.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

it's a known allergy, we are testing to see if he has outgrown it.

I see.

To what?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

milk

4:40 AM

Ah.

Feeding him small quantities yourself was too risky?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

He can eat cooked milk, but not raw

Well... we were doing that at some point, but there were unexplained hives and so we stopped.

Hmm.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

anyway the allergist did a blood test and told us to bring him in.

Well, good luck and good night!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

thanks.

cya

4:41 AM

see you later

I'm off too!

poof

bye

5:26 AM

Hi

hi

I'm having a doubt with constructing a past progressive sentence.

If I say these:

I was walking in the park.
I was singing in the bathroom.

Would these sentences be considered to be in past progressive?

It seems to me that they are missing some context e.g. a certain time when the events occurred.

3 hours later…

8:28 AM

@Cerberus Could not install it, something is seriously broken

Phonics The Hedgehog

8:40 AM

Does it not work or could you literally not install it?

Is this correct? "Answers which are entirely copy pasted from others websites will be subjected to delete from now"

in terms of grammar?

@PhonicsTheHedgehog It says something like cannot install to this location

"Answers which are entirely copied and pasted from other websites will be subjected to deletion from now on."

@JohanLarsson Interesting...

9:02 AM

yeah, 10% makes little sense, nature is rarely that wasteful.

yep

like they say, evolution would have cut the waste long ago...

Phonics The Hedgehog

9:30 AM

@skullpatrol You might want to specifically reply to his message, otherwise he wouldn't get the ping

thanks @PhonicsTheHedgehog

38 mins ago, by skullpatrol

"Answers which are entirely copied and pasted from other websites will be subjected to deletion from now on."

user116848

Who said so? Is it true?

user116848

Even with "source" ?

It is true.

user116848

Where did you hear?

9:33 AM

@skullpatrol thanks, I changed it to Answers which are totally copy pasted from other websites should be deleted

Matt Эллен

@Arrowfar these are rules for a different stack exchange

but that also happens at EL&U

sometimes

user116848

@MattЭллен Yeah but the policy is still the same right? Because without copied "sources" sometimes answers can't look informed and good.

Matt Эллен

@Arrowfar the policy is to delete obvious copyright infringement on sight, yes

user116848

I see.

@Arrowfar In the interests of integrity.

Phonics The Hedgehog

9:41 AM

@skullpatrol Np

2 hours later…

11:51 AM

Hi

12:08 PM

hi

12:23 PM

Hi

@cpx They stand alone just fine. They specify the time as much as is needed. It could be yesterday, last year, 5 seconds ago, just not now. And it is not necessary grammatically to specify. For story purposes, sure, the listener probably wants to know when, but grammatically it is fine.

Matt Эллен

12:52 PM

I am stuck on level 29 of game about squares

Is that^ BEng?

Matt Эллен

gameaboutsquares.com

it is that upon which I am stuck

@skullpatrol replace "game about squares" with "tetris" and you get the idea

absolutely perfect English :D

Matt Эллен

:D

toooo perfect for me

Matt Эллен

12:56 PM

pluperfect!

i surrender

« first day (1358 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3557 days later) »

Transcript for

Jul '1431

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

phrase-requests pronunciation single-word-requests synonyms

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile